Hi Enrico,

I think this change should NOT have an influence on routing, so it would be an
error in mkgmap if it does.
Please double check this result.

Gerd

Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 23:33:31 +0200
From: eliboni@gmail.com
To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Rendering Tunnels

Dziêki Andrzej! By removing  "road_class=2 road_speed=3" from the 2nd line, routing works and tunnels are visible - here is how it looks line:

highway=secondary & ( network=e-road | int_ref=* ) [0x04 resolution 18-19 continue]
highway=secondary  [0x04 resolution 20-21 continue]
highway=secondary & tunnel=yes [0x11 road_class=2 road_speed=3 resolution 22]
highway=secondary  [0x04 road_class=2 road_speed=3 resolution 22]

All looks fine now, and routable!

Enrico

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Andrzej Popowski <popej@poczta.onet.pl> wrote:
Hi Enrico,

> I believe this was my intention: up to res 21 I'd like the line to
> appear as 0x04, from resolution 22 it should appear as 0x11 if a
> tunnel, otherwise 0x04 - no further processing is needed. Could you
> pls let me know why the reasoning is not correct?

 This is correct. I have assumed that you'd like to get 2 lines for tunnels: standard road and additional marking for tunnel.

As I understand, routing parameters are only valid for layer 24 (or the last layer in a map). I would remove road_class and road_speed from line:
highway=secondary  [0x04 road_class=2 road_speed=3 resolution 20-21 continue]

Maybe this is the reason for routing errors?


--
Best regards,
Andrzej
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev


_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev